This is absurd. Unless their intent is to make a mockery of the entire process and trash the Focus, what possible point can they make? Other than it confirms for me, the utter lack of objectivity that car rags have these days and the utter stupidity of the editors.

This is absurd. Unless their intent is to make a mockery of the entire process and trash the Focus, what possible point can they make? Other than it confirms for me, the utter lack of objectivity that car rags have these days.

The BRZ was in a similar position last year, and it placed 4th behind C63 AMG Black, Nissan GTR, and Carrera S... so unless you think the Focus ST is a much much worse car than the BRZ, it has somewhat of a chance. Note that I think that the BRZ is a better driver's car than the ST.

EDIT: It's not about outright speed. I am pretty sure the ST will be a better driver's car than the Bentley, Vanquish, M6... maybe even that ridiculous Viper.

The BRZ was in a similar position last year, and it placed 4th behind C63 AMG Black, Nissan GTR, and Carrera S... so unless you think the Focus ST is a much much worse car than the BRZ, it has somewhat of a chance. Note that I think that the BRZ is a better driver's car than the ST.

This confirms what I said. I'm not ragging on you personally, please understand, but the results from last year that you bring up support my argument.

This is absurd. Unless their intent is to make a mockery of the entire process and trash the Focus, what possible point can they make? Other than it confirms for me, the utter lack of objectivity that car rags have these days and the utter stupidity of the editors.

I would assume that they will also factor in a "bang for the buck" sort of ratio to even things out. Obviously, there are plenty of cars on there that would run circles around an ST. However, price vs. performance and that unquantifiable "fun to drive" factor puts the ST in good contention with the others.

This confirms what I said. I'm not ragging on you personally, please understand, but the results from last year that you bring up support my argument.

Then I think I'm missing something. Can you explain further?

I think the idea is that you can only objectively rate a best driver's car based on subjective things that the car "communicates" or "makes you feel". You are probably right that there's no real way of judging this, but the bunch of journalists giving their opinions on the cars isn't such a bad way to go IMO.